From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 8 15:44:03 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B56A737B401; Thu, 8 May 2003 15:44:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0.freebsd-services.com (survey.codeburst.net [195.149.39.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F78843F93; Thu, 8 May 2003 15:44:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from paul@freebsd-services.com) Received: from [192.168.7.2] (freebsd.gotadsl.co.uk [81.6.249.198]) by mx0.freebsd-services.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F8D81B211; Thu, 8 May 2003 23:44:02 +0100 (BST) From: Paul Richards To: John Baldwin In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Organization: FreeBSD Services Ltd Message-Id: <1052433564.619.32.camel@cf.freebsd-services.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 Date: 08 May 2003 23:39:24 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: David O'Brien Subject: Re: Fw: /rescue X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 22:44:04 -0000 On Thu, 2003-05-08 at 21:15, John Baldwin wrote: > On 08-May-2003 David O'Brien wrote: > > On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 09:42:06AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > >> Yep, .PATH does simplify things. Revised diff > >> attached. Thanks for the suggestion. > > > > It was mostly decided to use /stand rather than /rescue as sticking with > > FreeBSD's 10 year precidence is better than going with NetBSD's <1 yr > > one. > > Nah. /stand is what we can fit into a mfsroot on a floppy. There > are probably several other useful things that can be added if you > remove that size constraint. Also, /stand historically has never > been updated by world. /rescuse would be kept up to date. These > are really two different things. Well, there's an argument for making /stand (or /rescue) small enough to still fit on a floppy because it then represents the minimal set of tools that are available to restore a hosed box, one where perhaps /stand is also hosed and you need to recover from your minimal recovery floppy. If people get used to nvi being available as a recovery tool then they'll never learn the skills necessary to recover from severe system failures. I think we're beginning to dumb down the expected skill levels a bit too much. -- Paul Richards FreeBSD Services Ltd